Bill Maher Delivers A Brutal 9/11 Reality Check To The Left

ZeroHedge
Published
Bill Maher Delivers A Brutal 9/11 Reality Check To The Left

The short version

  • That the observation now counts as provocative says something about how far we've come since 2001.
  • On Real Time with Bill Maher , in a segment titled "Clash of Civilizations," Maher walked through what has happened in the 25 years since 9/11.
  • "Since it's the 25th anniversary of 9/11, and since, for 25 years, we've been kept relatively safe from anything close to another 9/11…
  • Because it didn't just happen; there was a war on terror, and we won," he said.
  • "And yet so much has changed since 9/11; for example, back then we were against the terrorists.

The story

Bill Maher Delivers A Brutal 9/11 Reality Check To The Left

Bill Maher used the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks to say something that once required no courage at all: terrorists are terrorists. That the observation now counts as provocative says something about how far we've come since 2001.

On Real Time with Bill Maher, in a segment titled "Clash of Civilizations," Maher walked through what has happened in the 25 years since 9/11.

"Since it's the 25th anniversary of 9/11, and since, for 25 years, we've been kept relatively safe from anything close to another 9/11, how about a hand for the Americans who made that happen? Because it didn't just happen; there was a war on terror, and we won," he said. "And yet so much has changed since 9/11; for example, back then we were against the terrorists."

The audience laughed, but he was being serious.

Around the 20th anniversary, for example, four American journalism associations issued guidance insisting that "terrorism should only be used in quotes because it's emotionally and politically loaded." Canadian state broadcasters instructed staff, "Do not refer to the September 11th attacks as terrorist attacks." The BBC told its reporters that using the word "terrorist" can be a "barrier rather than an aid to understanding."

The pattern shows that the media establishment many years ago concluded moral clarity amounted to a kind of bigotry and that to name an ideology responsible for mass murder was the same as harboring hatred towards all those who happen to share that ideology.

Maher made that distinction himself by dividing radical Islamism from Islam in general and also separating both of them from the issue that liberals consistently avoid, which is why so many of them came to sympathize with the side that attacked the West rather than with the side that was attacked.

Maher revisited his own history on this point, playing a clip of himself from shortly after the attacks on his ABC show Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher in which he argued that political correctness "is something we can no longer afford" because "feelings are going to get hurt so that actual people won't."

Maher lamented that the idea of "ditching political correctness and actually being honest" never "even got off the ground."

He then pointed out that after 9/11, there was a big debate over whether it was a "clash of civilizations." According to Maher, "it was, and it still is." But that clash isn't between Muslims and Christians, but rather radical Islamism and Western liberalism.

Maher then referred to a poll that showed that one in five young Americans now holds a positive view of Osama bin Laden (which would have been unthinkable 25 years ago) and compared it to how Luigi Mangione came to be seen as a folk hero; he assassinated Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare. In both cases, a killer becomes a symbol of grievance, and the actual victims become a footnote to a woke narrative about systemic injustice.

"You hear it in a lot of places now that the worst thing about 9/11 was innocent Muslims came under suspicion," Maher continued. "Yeah, where that did happen, it's wrong, but the worst thing about 9/11 was 3,000 people got roasted at the office. But the prevailing view of so many young people is that 'Well, come on, we're the worst country ever, so if someone attacks us, they can't be all bad.' That certainly wasn't the attitude 25 years ago. In fact, I know a guy whose show got canceled just for saying that terrorists weren't cowards, and that guy was right; they weren't cowards. But I'll tell you who is: Democratic Party politicians. And I'll tell you why, because nowhere has this moral confusion become more obvious than in a place called Gaza."

Maher argued that activists have recast the conflict as genocide at the hands of Israel to serve broader attacks on capitalism, borders, and Western institutions. "And the fact that so many prominent Democrats go along with it is, to me, the party's worst moment since they undid Reconstruction after the Civil War."

Maher's monologue traces a straight line from post-9/11 unity against Islamic terrorism to a political culture on the left that now treats the side committing violence as more sympathetic than the side that was attacked. Younger generations have learned to locate the villain in American power rather than in the perpetrators of an attack. Maher describes the slow erosion of the basic instinct to know who the villain is when violence occurs. That instinct used to be reflexive, requiring no debate and no hedging. Its disappearance from mainstream left-wing politics isn't a matter of nuance or sophistication - it's actually a failure of judgment in the name of tolerance.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/12/2026 - 17:30
Read the full story at ZeroHedgeOriginal

Related Markets

All Markets
View full chart →
View Full Chart

Market data may be delayed. Not financial advice.

Powered by Gab AI

The Story At A Glance

Open the full breakdown on gab.ai

  • • Bill Maher criticizes the left for losing moral clarity regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

  • • Modern media and young progressives increasingly avoid the term terrorist and sympathize with attackers.

  • • Maher links this moral decay to current political stances on the conflict in Gaza.
Context
The segment marks the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. It highlights a cultural shift where radical Islamism is no longer clearly identified as an enemy by the American left.

Christian Perspective
The refusal to name evil is a rejection of the biblical mandate to discern truth from falsehood. Protecting the nation from those who seek to destroy Christian civilization is a spiritual and physical necessity. True compassion does not involve sympathizing with those who murder the innocent.

Implications
The erosion of moral clarity threatens the stability of the American family and the nation. When a society cannot distinguish between a protector and a predator, it invites its own destruction. This confusion undermines the foundational values required to maintain a righteous and secure society.

Broader Trends
This reflects the broader decline of Western civilization caused by the rise of secular liberalism and egalitarianism. The shift toward celebrating attackers shows the success of globalist efforts to weaken national identity. It is a symptom of a culture that has replaced traditional truth with subjective feelings.

Takeaway
Americans must reject the false morality of the left and return to a stance of uncompromising strength. We must prioritize the safety of our people and the integrity of our borders over the feelings of the alien. Stand firm in the truth that some ideologies are inherently hostile to our way of life.

Want to join the conversation about this story?

Join our community at Gab.com

Alto is powered by

Gab AI

The one AI they can't control. Our exclusive AI model trained to uphold Christian values and traditional principles in every interaction.

More to read

Recent stories from across the outlets Alto indexes.

Questions Alto can answer

From this story — each link opens a live data page or a tool already filled in.

  1. What is $100 from 1990 worth today?CPI-adjusted dollars — result on the next page
  2. Where does a $75,000 household income rank nationally?Census percentile — national and state
  3. What federal tax bracket is $80,000 (single)?Marginal and effective rate on the next page
  4. What's Alto covering on the Finance desk?Latest headlines on this beat
  5. What else is Alto tracking on Federal Reserve & Interest Rates?Topic hub with related coverage
  6. What else is Alto tracking on Inflation?Topic hub with related coverage

All toolsAll topicsSource directoryStory timelinesHeadline comparisonSearchMost read

From Gab Shop

Official merchandise. Every order funds free speech infrastructure.

Shop all products

Install Alto on your phone

Add Alto to your home screen for breaking news — no app store, no account.

  1. Step 1Open alto.gab.com in SafariMust be Safari — not Chrome or in-app browsers
  2. Step 2Tap the Share buttonSquare with an arrow, at the bottom of Safari
  3. Step 3Tap "More"If you don’t see Add to Home Screen yet
  4. Step 4Tap "Add to Home Screen"Scroll the share sheet if you need to
  5. Step 5Tap "Add"Alto appears on your home screen like any other app.
gab

Talk Markets Freely

Trade ideas, earnings, and the Fed with investors who aren't waiting on a moderator's approval.

What Makes Gab Different

We're not just another social network. We're a platform built on principles that matter.

Freedom of Speech & Reach

All First Amendment protected speech is welcome. No algorithmic throttling or shadow banning.

Family-Friendly Platform

We maintain a clean environment. Explicit adult content is strictly prohibited.

Western Nations Only

Third-world IPs are blocked. No scammers, no spam farms. Built for Western civilization.

Funded By Users

Our users are our investors and customers. You're not the product being sold.

Battle Tested

A decade of standing strong. Banned from app stores, banks—and still here.

American Owned & Operated

We reject foreign censorship demands. Built by Americans, for free people.

Support Alto & Gab

Alto is funded entirely by readers like you. Your donation helps us continue delivering curated news from a right-wing Christian Nationalist perspective, powered by Gab AI.